| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | "David G(dot) Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Robert Zenz <robert(dot)zenz(at)sibvisions(dot)com>, "pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions |
| Date: | 2018-01-29 16:00:20 |
| Message-ID: | 2870.1517241620@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
"David G. Johnston" <david(dot)g(dot)johnston(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> On Mon, Jan 29, 2018 at 8:33 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>> What we do have though is client-side support for appropriate behaviors.
>> In psql, see the AUTOCOMMIT and ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK control variables.
> Not quite the same. I think what people probably want is for psql to
> recognize it is in a transaction and before sending a command to the server
> for processing to precede it by sending "SAVEPOINT random()". Then, before
> returning the result of the command to the user issue either "RELEASE
> SAVEPOINT" or "ROLLBACK TO SAVEPOINT" depending on whether the command
> succeeded or failed. Then report the result to the user.
Which part of that isn't implemented by ON_ERROR_ROLLBACK?
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Boussekey | 2018-01-29 16:01:03 | Re: PG Sharding |
| Previous Message | Robert Zenz | 2018-01-29 15:50:36 | Re: Information on savepoint requirement within transctions |